The Pennsylvania PUC has denied rehearing sought in separate motions from two brokers who had their electric licenses cancelled due to what the PUC had found was failure to file proof of security in the directed format.

Tybec Energy Management Specialists, Inc. had sought rehearing of the cancellation of its electric broker license for failing to maintain proof of proper financial security as required under Commission regulations.

Regarding Tybec's rehearing request, the PUC adopted a motion from Commissioner John Coleman, who wrote, "In keeping with Commission precedent, I believe we must reject this Petition for Reconsideration since the Duick standards have not been met as no new or novel arguments have been raised by the appellant. While I understand Tybec's argument that this lapse was due to a failure to follow up with its financial institution regarding this matter, this is not sufficient justification for non-compliance with our regulations."

"Our current process has proven to be an efficient and fair method for holding suppliers accountable for maintaining their financial security with the Commission. Tybec was given notice well in advance of a tentative order cancelling their license, which provided even more time for them to remedy this situation," Coleman wrote

"Granting reconsideration where ordinary care could have prevented this outcome would be poor precedent and would significantly erode the standard of accountability this Commission holds suppliers to on this important issue. We do note that Tybec may file a new application with the Commission to provide electric generation supplier services, if they so choose," Coleman wrote

In a separate matter, the PUC published an order denying a request for rehearing from NRG Kiosk LLC, d/b/a/ Power Kiosk LLC that had requested reconsideration of the Commission’s final order entered March 20, 2017 that had terminated Power Kiosk’s electric broker license failing to maintain proof of proper financial security as required under Commission regulations.

In its Petition, Power Kiosk averred that it, "responded to the PUC request to send bond renewal certificate on time before the deadline date." Additionally, Power Kiosk averred that it was given insufficient time to cure any deficiencies of its financial instrument while making several references to attached emails.

In denying Power Kiosk's request for rehearing, the PUC stated in its order, "Although Power Kiosk timely sent a bond, the bond was deficient for various reasons. The four Secretarial Letters acknowledge Power Kiosk’s responses. However, Power Kiosk is required under 52 Pa. Code § 54.42(a) to comply with all applicable requirements of the code and Commission regulations and orders, which include submitting an acceptable financial instrument. Finally, the Commission’s Secretary letter dated April 4, 2017 was sent to the address that matches the letterhead on Power Kiosk’s Petition. The letter provided Power Kiosk 20 days from the date of the letter, April 24, 2017, to file the original financial instrument in order to satisfy the Commission’s requirements for bond. Power Kiosk did not do so."

"Upon review of the record, we find that Power Kiosk has not satisfied the Duick standards for rescission or amendment. The four Secretary letters notified Power Kiosk of its bond’s deficiencies and how to cure such deficiencies. The last two Secretary letters stated that the bond was deficient because it was a copy and detailed the Commission’s bonding requirements an original should include. The Commission allowed Power Kiosk to cure these deficiencies by April 24, 2017, which extended beyond March 31, 2017, the date that Power Kiosk asserted was necessary to satisfy such deficiencies. Finally, Power Kiosk does not aver that it never received any of these Secretary letters. We do note that Power Kiosk may file a new application with the Commission to provide electric generation supplier services, if it so chooses," the PUC stated